This. I want a build-up to Justice League. To me, I only want to see one Justice League movie, but ramping it up and introducing characters as we go through the MoS, WW and Trinity movies would be great.

I think a Trinity movie would be a good idea because it can ease in the world building. It can introduce the idea of the superheroes first teaming up, and since Wonder Woman is a risky property to the studio they can more confidently bring her in.

People will be interested in learning more about WW and that would support her solo movie. It would also be secured by benefiting from the anticipation of a Justice League movie. I think all that would secure success for Wonder Woman hoping that the movie itself is good.

Only for something else to happen and get WB all scared of what to do and change their minds.

__________________I was at some diplomatic party once. Got to talking to this princess who told me that when it came to Superman, I was missing the point. She told me, "His real strength lay in his generous spirit and sense of what's fair." - King Faraday
"He’s much more of a working class superhero, which is why we ended the whole book with the image of a laboring Superman. He’s Everyman operating on a sci–fi Paul Bunyan scale." - Grant Morrison

__________________I was at some diplomatic party once. Got to talking to this princess who told me that when it came to Superman, I was missing the point. She told me, "His real strength lay in his generous spirit and sense of what's fair." - King Faraday
"He’s much more of a working class superhero, which is why we ended the whole book with the image of a laboring Superman. He’s Everyman operating on a sci–fi Paul Bunyan scale." - Grant Morrison

Rebooting the VERY successful Nolan Batman film franchise within 3 years after that particular Trilogy ends?

The general movie going public will be confused.....big time!

Spidey didn't even do it that quick.

Well, with the Spider-Man franchise they were going to go with a sequel, but when the Rami/MacGuire team bid too high they decided to reboot. Had they made that decision sooner, I feel they would have made The Amazing Spiderman sooner since making money has no holding period. I don't think the public would have been confused since we knew from the start the the film was going to be a reboot (it's not like people don't read the news).

Well, with the Spider-Man franchise they were going to go with a sequel, but when the Rami/MacGuire team bid too high they decided to reboot. Had they made that decision sooner, I feel they would have made The Amazing Spiderman sooner since making money has no holding period. I don't think the public would have been confused since we knew from the start the the film was going to be a reboot (it's not like people don't read the news).

WB's better hire Aronofsky or possibly R Johnson for the eventual reboot if they are going to have a chance of not embarrassing themselves.

They were huge successes as far a popularity goes (each successive film made more world wide than the last). The real issue was that Marvel was obligated to pay Sony 25% of the revenues after the third film and they had to find a way to cut production costs in order to do that. I have already suggested my list of directors and neither of the two you have suggested are on that list.

Rebooting the VERY successful Nolan Batman film franchise within 3 years after that particular Trilogy ends?

The general movie going public will be confused.....big time!

Spidey didn't even do it that quick.

It's best to reboot Batman 5 to 7 years after the last movie, and in his own solo film. With no origin. But a young Batman. Now when i say young Batman, that could mean Bruce Wayne (2nd year or so after his debut) or Terry McGinnis (2nd year or so after his debut).

Since we're using Spidey as an example..

The problem with Marc Webbs reboot wasn't the fact that it was rebooted. It was 5 years after the previous movie, which was a critical failure. I dont think they could have made it "Spider-Man 4". The fact that they rebooted with a teenager Parker, who hasn't met the Osbornes yet or MJ or encountered Venom, Doc Ock...that part was fine. But the fact that they took the time to do the entire origin over again? That's the problem. All WB has to do is reboot (a handful to several years after Nolans) and dont retell the origin over the course of a 2 hour flick.

They could have easily started Amazing Spider-Man with Parker already in the suit, a year into it. Which is where the sequel will begin. It could have been a combination of TASM 1 AND 2. Or simply what theyre doing with TASM 2.

I dont think the GA will be confused unless JL is out in 2015 and is linked to Henry Cavill. Nolans name, Goyers name, Zimmers name, all attached to MOS. The alien parts look otherwordly but Planet Earth looks like TDK. Hell, people are still only seeing TDKR on Blu-Ray for the first time.

I don't think the public will have a problem with Batman being rebooted. I think rebooting Batman and rebooting Spider-Man are two completely different scenarios. This was the first time Spider-Man was rebooted while Batman being rebooted and played by a different actor within short periods of time is nothing new. Basically, people are already used to seeing a new version of Batman within a short period of time. They weren't used to that with Spider-Man and that's why a lot of people bashed the reboot.

Plus, one of the main complaints with TASM is that they retold the origin. I'm assuming the Batman reboot will just jump in with an already established Batman. If that is the case, that makes it even less likely for most people to reject the reboot.

Well, with the Spider-Man franchise they were going to go with a sequel, but when the Rami/MacGuire team bid too high they decided to reboot.

That was NOT the reason why Sony rebooted the Spider-Man franchise. The producers wouldn't give Raimi creative freedom (which he earned since those three films made a pretty penny for Sony and Marvel Entertainment), and Raimi decided to leave to avoid a repeat of Spider-Man 3.

I'm sick of people acting like "well, Raimi was getting too expensive and SM-3 was awful, that's why they rebooted". I guarantee you guys that if the producers (aka Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin) had let Raimi have creative control for Spider-Man 4 -- he would've likely deferred his usual big upfront payment in order to make the film he wanted. There would be no Amazing Spider-Man, we would've had two more Raimi Spider-man movies.

It's best to reboot Batman 5 to 7 years after the last movie, and in his own solo film. With no origin. But a young Batman. Now when i say young Batman, that could mean Bruce Wayne (2nd year or so after his debut) or Terry McGinnis (2nd year or so after his debut).

I agree. I think the 2015 is just WB wanting to get it out there as soon as possible without really thinking things through. I agree that the 5-7 year gap is long enough for a reboot to be accepted by the audience as a whole.

Now they'll still be people in 5-7 years who still wont accept a reboot , but alot of those people won't accept anyone else as Batman but Bale regardless of when the reboot happens.

That was NOT the reason why Sony rebooted the Spider-Man franchise. The producers wouldn't give Raimi creative freedom (which he earned since those three films made a pretty penny for Sony and Marvel Entertainment), and Raimi decided to leave to avoid a repeat of Spider-Man 3.

I'm sick of people acting like "well, Raimi was getting too expensive and SM-3 was awful, that's why they rebooted". I guarantee you guys that if the producers (aka Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin) had let Raimi have creative control for Spider-Man 4 -- he would've likely deferred his usual big upfront payment in order to make the film he wanted. There would be no Amazing Spider-Man, we would've had two more Raimi Spider-man movies.

Except that Tobey really didn't seem to want to do it either. No starring actor, no movie.

__________________

"That was the edge Parker had; he knew that survival was more important than heroics. It isn't how you play the game, it's whether you win or lose.”
~ Richard Stark, Deadly Edge